
It was only a matter of time before the purebred dog debate spilled over into the much less-familiar world of cat breeding. In this piece from the Mail, the ''inbreeding'' of pedigree cats is blamed for a variety of health concerns related to felines including cancer, sensitive skin and monorchidism.
It really bothers me how the word ''inbred'' is being used as the catchphrase for any illness or negative trait connected to these animals. Of course I'm not suggesting that the potential outcome of a father-daughter or brother-sister mating could be anything less than disastrous if the genetic slot-machine lands on 3 unlucky stars (the chances of which obviously increasing in such a mating if those predispositions exist.) But journalists are using inbreeding as an easy and over-simplified explanation to draw readers in. Its a highly charged word that strikes an emotional chord with people, but realistically cannot be the one-size-fits-all answer for everything. Consider how outcrossed the human race is and the growing number of genetic problems we face.
A similar story ran in the Telegraph, seen here. It finished with a quote from the owner of a pet website who said on the subject of purebreds ''It is man imposing his idea of what a cat should look like. It is the tyranny of breeding." I hope that the readers of those comments consider the many great things that the tradition of breeding animals for purpose,function and even appearance has afforded us . To describe it as tyranny is absurd, but then again the absurd makes for great headlines.






